On Thu, Sep 16 2021, Jeff Hostetler wrote: > On 9/16/21 4:01 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 16 2021, Taylor Blau wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 07:35:59AM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: >>>> So I think this patch can be dropped from this series, since it's exact >>>> duplicate of my 48f68715b14 (tr2: stop leaking "thread_name" memory, >>>> 2021-08-27) in ab/tr2-leaks-and-fixes, currently in "next" and marked >>>> for a merge with master. >>> >>> I agree it can be dropped. >>> >>>> When submitting a series that depends on another one it's best to rebase >>>> it on top of it & indicate it as such in the cover letter, Junio can >>>> queue such a series on top of another one. >>>> >>>> In this case I'm still not sure why this fix is here, i.e. surely >>>> nothing later in the series absolutely needs this stray memory leak >>>> fix... >>> >>> But there's no need for Jeff to depend on your branch, since (as you >>> mentioned) this cleanup isn't relevant for anything else in this series, >>> which is a sort of grab-bag of miscellaneous clean-ups. >> Indeed, to be clear it was just general advice about queue-on-top. >> But to clarify what I was getting at here: If we just came up with >> the >> same diff I'd have assumed Jeff just hadn't need the change in "next", >> but since he clearly has I was confused by it being here. >> I.e. it doesn't *seem* like anything in the rest of the series >> depends >> on it, so why have it here at all since the bug is being fixed anyway? >> Or if it does depend on it in some subtle way I've missed, perhaps it >> does need to be queued on top of ab/tr2-leaks-and-fixes, and the >> relevant commit/subtle dependency needs to be called out in a commit >> message. >> Or maybe Jeff had just come up with this independently, noticed it >> just >> before submission and just updated the CL, not the patch or series >> itself :) >> > > I'll drop this commit since your version is already queued up > and headed to master. I've been carrying it in my dev branch > for a while and was using it to make leak reporting a little > quieter. > > And yes, I just noticed that yours had advanced when I wrote the > cover letter and ACKd it rather than dropping it. > > And no, nothing in the rest of the whole FSMonitor series depends > on this, so I can leave my series based upon master rather than > your branch. > > Thanks > Jeff Sounds good, thanks for clarifying. In any case by the time you'll re-roll this (or soon thereafter) Junio will probably have merged it down anyway.
